The rare process and ceremony of mato oput is undertaken only in the case of intentional or accidental killing of an individual. The ceremony involves two clans bringing together the perpetrator and the victim in a quest for restoring social harmony.
Mato oput begins by separating the affected clans, mediation to establish the ‘truth’ and payment of compensation according to by-laws. The final ritual, ‘drinking the bitter root’ is a day-long ceremony involving symbolic acts designed to reunite the clans.
The photos below illustrate the ‘beating of the stick’ followed by the sacrifice and exchange of sheep by both parties; the mixing of the bitter oput root with kwete and blood to be drunk by both parties as a symbol of washing away the bitterness; and the eating of the liver, to restore good relations.
The ceremony is followed by a celebration and restored relationships.
The cleansing of an area through ritual sacrifice to chase away discontented spirits (and prevent misfortune) or to appease the ancestors (to encourage good fortune). The ritual is being done at areas of massacres or war related fighting to prevent further deaths from occurring in the area.
As one Elder stated: “The issue of communal ceremonies came about because of the conflict and the magnitude of the problem associated with it….The people have lost their shrines (kac) and in Acholi these shrines are supposed to be in the original homestead or clan. The traditional rituals need money [but] our people cannot afford them. So we felt these communal ceremonies would help those who cannot organize it on their own.”
A community member shares his views at a JRP community dialogue
This report presents the diverging opinions that exist among the war-affected people in northern Uganda concerning how post-conflict issues of justice and reconciliation should be handled.
These responses were gathered by JRP camp focal persons from four community dialogues conducted in Kitgum and Amuru districts in 2008. The dialogues present opinions of participants about how reconciliation and healing can be promoted among the war-affected communities in northern Uganda.
They indicate that while many people in northern Uganda are of the view perpetrators of war crimes need to be forgiven, a significant majority would also like to see some form of accountability meted out. The views of war-affected persons about the role of local mechanisms in post-conflict reconciliation and healing in northern Uganda also feature in the dialogues. While it has always been assumed that war-affected communities wholeheartedly support the use of local mechanisms such as mato oput, it is also interesting to note that a significant minority have reservations about the effectiveness and relevance of these mechanisms. Equally interesting and controversial is the opinion of respondents about who is responsible for the conflict in northern Uganda.
Two residents stand at the site where their sons were killed in the massacre
In the early morning hours of 24 July 2002, the villages around Mucwini awoke to the bloodied corpses of 56 men, women and children. The massacre was a deliberate and ruthless retaliation by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) after a local man they had abducted escaped from them with a gun. After they were finished with their ‘work,’ the LRA wrote a letter to the populace, blaming them for the massacre and threatening more killings if the stolen gun was not recovered.
In the aftermath of the massacre, the victims accused the escaped man of purposely orchestrating the massacre to resolve a long standing land dispute between his clan and that of the majority of victims. Since the massacre, both clans have ceased relations and have threatened retaliation if the issue is not resolved using the traditional mechanism of Mato Oput (drinking the bitter root). The victim clan demands the payment Kwor, or death compensation and the elders have busied themselves trying to cool tensions. In the absence of formal justice, the victims attempt to come to terms with what happened using what is available to them: traditional justice mechanisms.
The aftermath of the Mucwini massacre is an important case study of the justice and reconciliation challenges facing peace builders as the Juba Peace Talks conclude. Documenting the events of the massacre and attempts by victims to come to terms with it, this Field Note identifies three important lessons for understanding the impact of violence on community level relations in northern Uganda, and the prospects for transitional justice. First, it illustrates how the local victim population copes with the aftermath of gross atrocity in the absence of accountability. Secondly, it suggests the need to revisit the potential role of traditional justice mechanisms to resolve local conflicts. Finally, it highlights how the war has exacerbated underlying tensions around land ownership.
Participants during the workshop on accountability and reconciliation in Kampala
This workshop follows the conclusion of the Final Peace Agreement (FPA) in Juba between the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Government of Uganda (GoU). Mediated by the Government of Southern
Sudan (GoSS) under Chief mediator Dr.Riek Machar, the vice president of Southern Sudan, this remarkable agreement which begun two years ago was to be signed by LRA leader Joseph Kony on 10th April 2008. However, he did not sign as expected and instead sought clarifications on the specificities on the protocol of accountability and reconciliation as well as the disarmament, demobilization and re-integration agreements. In particular, the LRA leader Joseph Kony wanted to know more about the Acholi traditional justice system of mato oput, its linkage to the proposed special division of the High Court and other formal institutions in the agreements.
It was on the basis of this that His Highness Rwot David Onen Acana II, the Acholi Cultural leader, with the assistance of the Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP), was tasked to lead a consultative process that would bring together like minded actors to deliberate in an attempt to provide clarity to the LRA leaders’ concerns. Therefore, on the 6th and 7th May 2008, a workshop was convened at the Fairway Hotel, Kampala.
The objective of the workshop was to clarify the procedural steps required for the implementation of the Agreement on Accountability. As a result, the workshop was to produce an explanatory note outlining procedures on key technical issues in the Agreement on Accountability and Reconciliation that was to be made immediately available to the LRA leadership.
In arriving at these, the conference organizers identified key themes to be discussed, and these included: (i) the role of investigations and self-disclosure; (ii) the criteria for allocation of individuals to the various proceedings; (iii) description of various accountability institutions (courts, traditional justice, and truth-telling mechanisms) and their jurisdictions; (iv) the relationship between the various accountability institutions, and, (v) the possible outcomes of the proceedings for individuals..
This declaration was signed by cultural and religious leaders in the sub-regions of West Nile (Madi), Teso, Lango and Acholi after the first anniversary of the Juba Peace Talks.
The declaration made several recommendations in the areas of truth, reparations, reconciliation and complementarity. Noteworthy is the call for traditional justice mechanisms to be used for justice and reconciliation.
A woman lays a wreath at the Attiak memorial service, 2007
Recent national and international debates on truth and reconciliation in Uganda have emphasized the importance of incorporating local level mechanisms into a transitional justice strategy. This report seeks to contribute to this discussion by focusing on local level mechanisms in Acholi-land and determining how these might promote truth-telling and reconciliation at the community level.
Underlying the research are three main objectives: to assess whether or not grassroots, war-affected persons in the region want a truth-telling process; to assess the possibilities of adapting local mechanisms to promote truth and reconciliation at the community level; and lastly, to present the results, observations and recommendations found in this report to relevant policy-makers (the Government of Uganda, local-level leadership in Uganda, and the international community). The research reveals that there is indeed a need for a truth-telling process in northern
Uganda. Few atrocities have been documented or acknowledged publicly – most are contested and highly controversial. As a consequence, victims struggle to survive emotionally, socially and economically with tragic memories of loss, and with little to no high-level acknowledgement by the
Government of Uganda or by most of the LRA high command.
This concept note was prepared for presentation in a training workshop on information, counseling and referral services for reporters (formerly abducted persons) organized by the Amnesty Commission for its technical staff.
With the peace versus justice debate in Northern Uganda reaching a crescendo, different views have been expressed, with the majority focusing on peace through amnesty and a process of reconciliation. Local politicians, civil society organizations (CSOs), cultural and religious leaders have spoken strongly on behalf of the Northern population in support of forgiveness and reconciliation of the LRA, without necessarily consulting with grass-roots people they represent.
The dialogue below was conducted by the JRP in the internally displaced camp of Kitgum Matidi on the 9th of November 2006. It explores a variety of views of grass-roots actors on the theme of forgiveness and reconciliation. It finds that no general consensus exists on the desire or will to extend forgiveness to the LRA at this time. For some, forgiveness is not a choice but is derived out of the reality in which they live. “As for forgiveness, it appears like we have no option but to accept it. This is because we do not have weapons like our brothers in the bush. Since we do not have the weapons, we have no option but to accept.”
Grass-roots participants in the dialogue did not agree that mato oput, a process of restorative justice leading to a ceremony designed to promote reconciliation of two conflicting parities, could or should be performed in the context of on-going war.
The sequencing of peace and justice is viewed as extremely important by some grassroots actors: peace is a pre-requisite of reconciliation, and peace entails the ability to return and reconstruct homesteads, livelihoods, and fulfillment of basic human rights and freedoms. As one woman stated, “take a look at the camps….am I supposed to forgive from this mass homestead? For me to forgive I feel we should first go back home, so that I can forgive the person who hurt me from my own homestead.”
